Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jul, 2005 09:31 pm
I think it is too convenient to argue this question from one viewpoint.

The answers should be the same from the standpoint of a woman who wants her baby and one who does not. When is it a life ended and when is it not?

It is illogical and unsupportable to say that one man who has taken the life of an unborn child is a murderer, while across the street in a clinic, a man taking the life of an unborn baby is merely a doctor.
0 Replies
 
pragmatic
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jul, 2005 09:41 pm
Frank Apisa wrote:
There is no "baby" involved. It is a fetus. It has the same "rights" as a cancerous tumor or a wart.


Now that you put it that way...ewwww. Confused
0 Replies
 
pragmatic
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jul, 2005 09:44 pm
Lash wrote:
It is illogical and unsupportable to say that one man who has taken the life of an unborn child is a murderer, while across the street in a clinic, a man taking the life of an unborn baby is merely a doctor.


But wouldn't the issue of consent of the woman holding the baby come into play? If the mother consented to the doctor taking the life of the fetus, it is not murder (and according to Frank, there is no murder if there is no baby, but only a fetus.) If the "man" had killed the fetus in the hope of not having to raise a child (this has occurred in Australia - the male used a karate kick on his partner's child and this was actually held: no murder nor even mansalughter because the unborn was not a baby - argument to Frank's side but this case was in the 50s I think) then it could be regarded as murder - this will depend upon the law of each different country and jurisdiction in the world.

Hope I interepreted your post correctly Lash.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jul, 2005 10:06 pm
I diverged to talk of my own thinking as background, but I'd hope we all come back to Frank's question in his opening post (I tried to).
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 12:06 am
Frank,

You say a "fetus" is a "fetus" as long as it is in the womb. Am I correct in that? But the minute it is outside the womb it is a child?

So, two seconds before the "fetus" emerges from the mother, it is not a child?

So, does that mean you think it would be ok to abort a "fetus" in later months?

I am just asking because I don't want to be confused on this issue.

Also, can you elaborate on why you believe this? I read these posts but I don't clearly understand why you feel a fetus is not a child until it is outside the mother's body.
0 Replies
 
pragmatic
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 12:17 am
Momma Angel wrote:
Also, can you elaborate on why you believe this? I read these posts but I don't clearly understand why you feel a fetus is not a child until it is outside the mother's body.


In the legal area (eg: where the courts decided whether it was murder if the fetus was killed while in the mother's body) the courts refer to scientific evidence.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 12:18 am
Momma Angel wrote:

I read these posts but I don't clearly understand why you feel a fetus is not a child until it is outside the mother's body.


There may be other reasons but I'm sure reading the definition in Websters wouldn't hurt.

Fetus.
fe·tus
n. pl. fe·tus·es

1. The unborn young of a viviparous vertebrate having a basic structural resemblance to the adult animal.
2. In humans, the unborn young from the end of the eighth week after conception to the moment of birth, as distinguished from the earlier embryo.


Wow, I'm really starting to sound like Frank.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 12:19 am
Pragmatic,

So, is what you are saying is that science says a "fetus" is not a child until outside the womb and then it becomes a "child?" I really want to be clear on this. I don't want to make any assumptions whatsoever.
0 Replies
 
pragmatic
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 12:23 am
Momma Angel wrote:
So, is what you are saying is that science says a "fetus" is not a child until outside the womb and then it becomes a "child?" I really want to be clear on this. I don't want to make any assumptions whatsoever.


The case I refered to in a previous post had looked at scientific evidence to determine that the child killed by his father's karate kick was not regarded as murder. That case was quite a few years ago and i'm not sure about the common law operation but some of the state statutes in Australia do deem such killing of a fetus as murder, although whether they based this decision upon religious, scientific or merely public policy reasons I am not certain of.

momma angel - feel free to post any objections to what I may have said. If I do think you have assumed wrongly I will point it out, no hard feelings. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 12:28 am
Well, I certainly can't argue with the definition of the dictionary. However, I can disagree with it.

I am one who believes that at the moment of conception there is a human being, not a completely formed human being, but a human being nonetheless.

I, myself, don't belief in abortion. Even though there are many situations in which a child is conceived, via rape, incest, etc., I believe the child should be allowed to live. It is an innocent human being. Didn't ask to be born and certainly isn't going to be asked to be killed.

There are many options to abortion. Adoption at the top of the list. There are so many couples out there wanting children and not being able to have their own.

It's true that the cause of the conception may not have been out of love, but I believe that the mother should consider the child. She can have the child and put it up for adoption. I would think it would be easier to live with that option than the choice of destroying her own child's life.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 12:33 am
Momma Angel wrote:

There are many options to abortion. Adoption at the top of the list. There are so many couples out there wanting children and not being able to have their own.


I've heard that particular religious groups who do adoptions will not adopt a child to someone other than their faith. I heard this years ago and don't know it's validity. Could someone with experience clarify?
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 12:35 am
Momma Angel wrote:
Well, I certainly can't argue with the definition of the dictionary. However, I can disagree with it.


Well, actually, you can't, at least not logically. It's not subjective. That's simply the definition of the word.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 12:43 am
Maporsche,

I have heard recently of an adoption agency that would not adopt a child to a couple because they did not practice the faith of the adoption agency.

It was said that each individual adoption agency has the right to makes its policy. The case I mentioned above is currently in litigation.

I can understand their way of thinking on this especially if they are wanting to adopt an older child that probably is getting some information along the line in the adoption agency of what the agency's beliefs are. If the adoptive parents believe the same they will continue to teach the child in that faith.

However, I am not sure that I agree with doing that. Though I may not agree with all the religions out there, I do believe that everyone has the right to believe what they believe and pass that belief along to their children.

But in the case above, I think the best thing for all would just have been the adoptive couple go somewhere else to adopt. They have right to choose the agency. So, if they don't like one for any specific reason, find one they do like.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 12:45 am
Well, maybe logically I can't disagree with it, but I do disagree with it. Besides, it was man that made up the word and man that put the definition to the word.
0 Replies
 
flushd
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 02:04 am
Why do people talk about believing or not believing in abortion?
You can agree or disagree about the practise.
No one would be fool enough to say that abortions do not exist.

It's an important distinction.
It exposes the 'issue' for what it really is: a battle of worldviews.

My own worldview is this: As a woman, I have the right to choose what I do with my body. A child grows from my flesh, is my flesh, and is my responsibility. I must choose whatever is best for me and this new part of me which is developing into an independent being. No one has the right to tell me what to do regarding my own flesh. Each is given their own opportunity to make their own choices, with their own bodies. I trust that we each have within us everything we need to live and love well.

Those are my opinions. As far as I've learned so far, and I am still young, the hardest thing to do is to just let people make their own choices. However, I'm convinced that it is the ONLY thing we really can do.

"The only thing you can control is yourself. Believe me, that's more than enough work for you. " a friend of mine
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 02:15 am
Ok. I see your point. So, let me say this. I do not agree with the practice of abortion.

I believe a child is a gift from God and though the child may be of your flesh, it is still God's creation.

I love your comment about the hardest thing to do is to just let people make their own choices. However, I'm convinced that is the ONLY thing we really can do.

Amen to that!
0 Replies
 
flushd
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 03:22 am
Momma, I respect your opinion.
In my own way, I agree with you about a child being a gift from God.
I certainly was not the one who decided and thought "okay, now i will make a womb for myself and direct the making of a child". Smile
All I get to choose is what to do with what I am given.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 04:41 am
Momma Angel wrote:
Frank,

You say a "fetus" is a "fetus" as long as it is in the womb. Am I correct in that? But the minute it is outside the womb it is a child?

So, two seconds before the "fetus" emerges from the mother, it is not a child?

So, does that mean you think it would be ok to abort a "fetus" in later months?

I am just asking because I don't want to be confused on this issue.

Also, can you elaborate on why you believe this? I read these posts but I don't clearly understand why you feel a fetus is not a child until it is outside the mother's body.


It is my opinion that to give in to the anti-choice faction on any part of their agenda...is to concede the entire of their agenda.

So long as it involves a woman's body...it is my contention that the woman decides whether to continue the pregnancy or not.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 04:46 am
I will try to do what others have tried unsuccessfully to do....which is to get back to my original question.

Since apparently the net result of an abortion is to have an innocent soul get a free pass into Heaven to spend all the rest of eternity in complete bliss with your god...

...where is the foul?

Why can you Christian zealots not concede the women of the world the right to control their own bodies in these instances....considering the fact that the end result for the aborted fetus is something you folks are all striving for?
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 05:38 am
I am assuming you consider me to be one of those Christian zealots? If I am incorrect, oops!

So, let me try to answer your question to the best of my ability. You may not like it, but it's my answer.

I believe that according to man's laws, a person has the right to decide what is best for them. Those decisions are between the person and God. However, I do not always believe that is what is right according to God's laws.

And I just don't understand the logic of since it is a innocent soul anyway and it is going to go to heaven because of that, so what's the foul? To me, that's lot slaughtering all the boy children under the age of 2 because they are innocent and will go to heaven. Now, I realize you feel there is a difference between a "fetus" and a "child", but I don't agree with that so, I guess to you it's murder if it's slaughtering the male children but not the fetuses?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » ABORTION.......
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/04/2022 at 06:37:14